Chapter 10 - The “attachment instability” file
Daniel’s lawyer told him something he did not want to hear.
A trustee is not removed merely because a parent dislikes financial decisions.
To remove me, Daniel would need evidence of things like:
Conflict.
Bad faith.
Failure of duty.
Or conduct materially harming Olivia’s interests.
My refusal to give him $1.8 million for a jointly titled house was not enough.
So Mara developed another argument.
I was allegedly interfering with Olivia’s emotional development.
If they could show that my involvement caused:
Severe separation distress.
Behavioral regression.
Parental defiance.
Sleep disruption.
Attachment instability.
Then Daniel could argue:
I was not acting as a neutral trustee.
I was using my financial role to maintain excessive personal influence over Olivia.
The goal was not to prove Olivia mentally ill.
The goal was to prove:
Grandpa Frank’s involvement was harmful enough that he should not control decisions about her trust.
That was why Mara recorded her crying after visits.
That was why transitions suddenly became confrontational.
That was why my visits became unpredictable.
And that was why Olivia had been locked behind the garden gate.
Mara had deliberately told her I was coming.
Then made her wait behind the locked gate.
She wanted Olivia to cry.
She wanted me to arrive and become angry.
She wanted a scene.
The hidden patio camera recorded everything.
Including Mara telling Daniel seven minutes before I arrived:
“Don’t let Frank get to her until we have enough.”
Daniel asked:
“Enough what?”
Mara answered:
“Enough to show what happens when he shows up.”
They were manufacturing context.
Not inventing Olivia’s tears.
May you like
Provoking them.
That was worse.
